I'm happy to see LC of TC, and I trust everyone working on it enough
that I am willing to attempt consensus on LC at our telecon tomorrow -
the agenda will be out shortly.
I have updated the Primer (although it needs lots of link fixing and
example checking, which I will try to get to today). I'll be neutral on
it - the TC are clearly more important.
I will also get a CR transition draft out for GRDDL Spec and e-mail to list.
Thanks for all the hard work!
Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>
>
> Hi Harry
>
> I am expecting to be able to formally propose moving the test cases to
> LC and the spec to CR, but not before the agenda deadline.
>
> The proposals will have the form
>
> Propose publishing LC of TC subject to:
> - a
> - b
> - c
>
> But I haven't worked out a, b and c yet.
>
> Note that while these two are related, it is possible to publish LC of
> Test Cases, without moving the spec to CR (which is procedurally more
> difficult). Hence it may be most effective to decide on the test cases
> prior to deciding on the spec. Hmmm... I guess I would structure the
> agenda:
>
> - issues against spec
> - test approvals
> - test cases for LC
> - other issues considering CR
> + lc comments
> + other process issues
> - spec for CR
>
> also depends on the current state of the primer.
> Personally, I am currently inclined to oppose LC on the primer, should
> anyone care to propose it.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
--
-harry
Harry Halpin, University of Edinburgh
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426